| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 4,482 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3546 Posts |
Hello, I just picked up this 1867 Shield nickel at a yard sale and wanted to receive feedback from everyone regarding its authenticity. Thank you, mdpmedia      |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
424 Posts |
 I'm not an expert on Shield nickels, but it looks real to me, and if you grabbed it at a yard sale, I suspect you got it pretty cheap. That's a nice one if real...$250 coin. Nice find! |
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
Looks legit to me. Is that a scratch on the obverse?
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
987 Posts |
After looking at it carefully I have no reason to doubt its authenticity. Great find. I have to start going to more yard sales.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1388 Posts |
I wish they had garage sales like that where I live...  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
BELOW is my earlier assessment of the coin ... I have to admit I was rwwrrwwwuhwuah... I was rwwrrwwwuhwuah... I was not exactly right.   Ye-ow! Did they have anything else at the yard sale? See those little vertical lines on the edge of the nickel? That is one place circulation wear is apparent as they disappear rather soon once they get passed around. The stars are not necessarily worn flat. This is sometimes the result of strike quality and die wear. I'll go out on a limb ... I think you have a MS63 or MS64 1867 beauty here and it even has rays for your type set. Perhaps a $500.00 plus nickel.    Edited by TNG
04/22/2012 11:20 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I'm not too happy. I am normally into ancient coins where fake coins abound, when it comes to medium and higher priced coins. You have obviously pictured the areas which you consider doubtful. Those blobs shouldn't really be there. Too many ' Cuds' to forget about. Those stars on the reverse should be much more distinct on a stars and rays nickel in this condition. All of the lettering is less distinct than it should be, for a nickel in this condition. Actually, I have a nice collection of U.S. coins including a gold dollar, where fakes also abound. The fine file marks on the rim are exactly are exactly the same as on a Roman Sestertius I recently bought as a fake, for four dollars. I actually buy all the fakes I can (PROVIDED they are sold as a fake), to provide a reference collection to aid in the identification of them. I would feel happy if others would like to shoot me down with what I have noted here. Shoot away! Edited by sel_69l
04/22/2012 12:59 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1389 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
It doesn't look right to me. Hope you didn't pay much.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6394 Posts |
Amazing how it looks great at first and then the details start raising flags. The gaps in the arrow shafts are a bad sign, as are the date digits which appear crudely formed. The horizontal shield lines seem very weak. The reverse bars are actually sharp (not common on this date) but the star radials don't match in sharpness. I haven't heard that counterfeit Shield nickels are much of a hazard for collectors but maybe that has changed. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
The arrow shafts are incomplete and the C in CENTS looks wanting for more of a C. Usually it's the vertical bars that are a giveaway for fakes and these are remarkably straight as they should be. You guys got me wondering too now.  I think if it is a fake, it is one of the best fakes I ever saw for a Shield nickel. The cross looks a little off, it should be a bit more squared off at the right angles. I guess I just was so excited for the OP that I only looked for wear. Yes, the closer I look comparing to other images I have found of genuine high grade 1867 w rays this is starting to bother me as well. Edited by TNG
04/21/2012 9:00 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
This one looks good at first glance but some of the details don't look so good like the date and arrow shafts. Overall details appear to be a bit mushy and there appears to be some lumps of metal on and around the 5. I am suspicious as well.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
I don't like the looks of this date either. The rest of coin looks mushy but the date really bugs me. Thoughts? 1867 Shield Nickel (With both reverses)     Edited by Moe145
04/21/2012 11:26 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3546 Posts |
Quote:
Is that a scratch on the obverse? yes Also, I just weighed this coin at 4.19 grams |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
There is always the standard ring tone test with modern coins.
|
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
That one is underweight, should be 5g. When a coin is heavily worn, that kind variation is acceptable - although I'd say that's about the outer limit. However, as this coin appears to be in what's supposed to be uncirculated (or nearly so), I'd say that's a pretty stout telltale.
These are very nice copies, though!
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 4,482 |
Posted 04/21/2012 5:32 pm
